Report List

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It never states that this is a non-destructive read, whether it is paginated, whether it covers all folders or a scoped subset, or whether it requires an active session — all meaningful gaps for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single four-word sentence with no filler and the resource front-loaded. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity is arguably under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the zero-parameter schema is trivially complete. What remains missing is scope and session context for a list operation among many report_* siblings, leaving the definition only minimally adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline is 4. The empty schema is fully consistent with the description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a concrete verb+resource ('List report folders'), which is enough for an agent to know it is a read-only enumeration tool. However, it does not differentiate itself from the many other report_* siblings (report_status, report_open, report_export), so the scope relative to alternatives is not made explicit.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use guidance is given. The description does not say when an agent should list report folders versus calling report_status, report_open, or report_export, nor does it mention prerequisites or ordering.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.